Sunday, 2 March 2014

A social history of Tea

A cup of tea is a vital
part of everyday life for the majority of people in modern Britain - in fact
tea is so integral to our routine, that it is difficult to imagine life without
it! But it was not always so; tea was once a luxury product that only the rich
could afford, and at one time there was even a debate about whether it might be
bad for the health. It was over the course of several hundred years that tea
gained its place as our national drink, and only relatively recently that its
health-giving properties have been recognised.

Tea first became
established in Britain because of the influence of a foreign princess, Catherine
of Braganza, the queen of Charles II. A lover of tea since her
childhood in Portugal, she brought tea-drinking to the English royal court, and
set a trend for the beverage among the aristocracy of England in the
seventeenth century.

The fashion soon spread beyond these elite circles to the middle
classes, and it became a popular drink at the London coffee houses where
wealthy men met to do business and discuss the events of the day. But the tea
that was being drunk in those seventeenth century coffee houses would probably
be considered undrinkable now. Between 1660 and 1689, tea sold in coffee houses
was taxed in liquid form. The whole of the day's tea would be brewed in the
morning, taxed by a visiting excise officer, and then kept in barrels and
reheated as necessary throughout the rest of the day. So a visitor to the
coffee house in the late afternoon would be drinking tea that had been made
hours before in the early morning! The quality of the drink improved after
1689, when the system of taxation was altered so that tea was taxed by the leaf
rather than by the liquid.

Some coffee houses also sold tea inloose leaf form so that it could be
brewed at home. This meant that it could be enjoyed by women, who did not frequent
coffee houses. Since it was relatively expensive, tea-drinking in the home
must have been largely confined to wealthier households, where women would
gather for tea parties. Such a party would be a genteel social occasion, using
delicate china pots and cups, silver tea kettles and elegantly carved tea jars
and tea tables. All the equipment would be set up by the servants, and then the
tea would be brewed by the hostess (aided by a servant on hand to bring hot
water) and served by her to her guests in dainty cups. Both green and black
teas were popular, and sugar was frequently added (though like tea, this was an
expensive import); in the seventeenth century though, it was still unusual for
milk to be added to the beverage. We can imagine then that while seventeenth
century men were at the coffee houses drinking tea and exchanging gossip, their
wives gathered at one another's homes to do exactly the same thing - just in a
more refined atmosphere!

Fluctuations in the level of tax meant fluctuations in the price of tea,
and during the seventeenth century frequent tea-drinking was beyond the means
of the majority of British people.But despite its high price, the British took
to tea drinking with enormous enthusiasm.

In the eighteenth century there was a clear gap between the large number
of people who wanted to enjoy tea regularly, and the relatively small number of
people who could actually afford to do so. And into this gap stepped the smugglers. If tea was smuggled in, no duty
was paid on it, so it could be sold much more cheaply. Highly-organised
smuggling networks were developed to cater for the popular demand for tea.
Though these gangs of smugglers could frequently be ruthless in their
practices, such was the popularity of tea-drinking that many people were
prepared to turn a blind eye. By the later eighteenth century, it is estimated
that more tea was smuggled into Britain than was brought in legally. This had
two important effects for tea drinking: firstly, because it made tea
affordable, it made the beverage ever more popular among all sections of
society, and ever more integral to everyday life. Secondly, because the
smugglers were based in coastal areas and their networks spread across the
countryside, it drove the enthusiasm for tea drinking out of the larger towns
and cities and into rural areas.

By 1785 the
government (under pressure from legal tea merchants whose profits were being
seriously undermined by all the smuggling) slashed the duty on tea, making it
much more affordable. This wiped out the illegal smuggling trade virtually
overnight. It still was not cheap, and for many years tea was often adulterated
with leaves from other plants or with leaves that had already been brewed,
which made it more affordable but much less pleasant! There was a great deal of
concern about adulteration - some unscrupulous individuals added poisonous
chemicals to make green 'tea' the right colour - and these concerns led to an
increase in popularity in black tea, and a parallel increase in the addition of
milk to tea. Such was the popularity of the beverage that many employers
provided free tea to their employees (just like tea breaks in offices and
factories today!) while household servants were often provided with a tea
allowance. Although it is not documented, these employers were surely well
aware that a cup of tea was just the thing to refresh their employees and perk
them up.

But not everyone agreed that tea was an approriate drink for the working
classes. Indeed, from the early eighteenth century well into the nineteenth
century a debate raged among middle and upper-class commentators about the
benefits or otherwise of tea drinking - and particularly about whether the
lower classes should be allowed to drink tea at all. This was partly based upon
a consideration of whether tea might be injurious to health (it was a long time
before the benefits of tea to health would be scientifically proven) but also
partly based upon snobbery and a belief that the poor existed essentially to
serve the needs of the rich.

In 1706 a book by a doctor from Montpelier, France, was translated into
English. Its title:Wholesome Advice against the Abuse of Hot Liquors'.
Its particular targets were tea, coffee and hot chocolate. In the late
seventeenth century, great medicinal claims had been made for hot drinks,
including tea, and this book was a response to them, arguing that though while
moderate consumption could be beneficial, an excess of hot drinks caused the
blood and insides to heat up and that 'Excess of Heat is the most Common Cause
of Sickness and Death'. Indeed, noted the doctor, 'The name of Phlegeton,
one of the rivers of Hell, coming from a word that signifies to Burn, denotes,
That the Abuse of Hot Liquors contributes very much to People the Kingdom of
Death'. Medical science at the time was so basic that the 'evidence' presented
in the book was based largely upon vague anatomical knowledge and references to
Bible stories and classical Greek and Roman texts. It is noted, for example,
that Methuselah, the Old Testament figure who lived almost a thousand years,
never drank hot liquors.

This book though
counselled moderation rather than abstinence (and noted indeed that an excess
of cold is equally as damaging as an excess of heat).

But a few decades
later in 1748 John Wesley, the great preacher and founder of the Methodist
movement, was arguing for complete absitinence from tea, on the grounds that it
gave rise to 'numberless disorders, particularly those of a nervous kind'. He
cited the example of himself, claiming that tea drinking had caused in him a
'Paralytick disorder', which had cleared up since he began to abstain from the
beverage. Wesley urged that the money previously spent by an individual on tea
should instead be given to the poor, and as an alternative hot infusions could
be made from English herbs including sage or mint. His argument was certainly
thorough (although medically entirely incorrect), and he even touched on how
one ought to deal with the awkward situation of having to refuse an offered cup
of tea. The tract is shot through with the emphasis on the religious importance
of self-denial that was a central tenet of early Methodism, but in fact at
later in his life Wesley went back to tea drinking.

In the following
years the debate about the health-giving properties of tea got under way in
earnest. An anonymous 'Gentleman of Cambridge' published a pamphlet claiming
(based on the work of a physician who had served no less a figure than the King
of Denmark!) that tea was virtually a cure-all. He cited conditions as varied
as scurvy, rheumatism, inflammation and poor sight, all of which he said could
be cured by the daily drinking of large quantities of tea. He also noted that
it was particularly beneficial to the 'fair sex' (meaning women), which was a
great contrast to the doctor of Montpelier, who was very concerned that hot
liquors could heat the womb and adversely affect a woman's fertility (his
evidence for the adverse effect of heat included the Biblical figure Rachel,
who had rather a hot temper, and had to wait many years to conceive).

In 1757 the
philanthropist Jonas Hanway published an essay on the effects of tea drinking,
'considered as pernicious to health, obstructing industry and impoverishing the
nation'. Published in the form of 25 letters written to two wealthy female
friends, Hanway dismissed the claim that tea could cure scurvy, and claimed
instead, like Wesley, that it caused 'paralitic and nervous disorders'. He was
particularly concerned about its effect on women: 'How many sweet creatures of
your sex, languish with weak digestion, low spirits, lassitudes, melancholy,
and... nervous complaints? Tell themto change their diet, and among other
articles leave off drinking tea, it is more than probable the greatest part of
them will be restored to health.' He also appealed to their vanity - insisting
that due to women drinking tea 'there is not quite so much beauty in this land
as there was'. But more than just injurious to women,Hanway believed that
tea-drinking risked ruining the nation, because of its increasing prevalence
among the working classes, and associated the drinking of tea with the drinking
of gin.

He argued that the
poor could ill-afford to spend their money on tea, claiming that 'those will
have tea who have not bread', and that children born to poor mothers were dying
because their mothers were spending all their money on tea, and drinking this
'liquid fire' while breast-feeding. This, he claimed, had led to a decline in numbers
in the workforce, which he believed was obstructing agriculture and
manufacturing, and would leave the country open to attack because there would
not be enough fit men for the army. Thus Hanway urged the rich to give up tea
drinking, in the hope that their example would be followed by the poor, on
whose labour Britain depended. Much of Hanway's essay is then based on the
assumption that the injurious habits of the poor must be controlled, not for
the sake of poor themselves, but because a decline in their numbers or would
ultimately be damaging to the interests of the rich.

In 1758 an anonymous author entered the debate with a pamphlet entitled The
Good and Bad Effects of Tea Consider'd, which very much supported Hanway's
arguments. The pamphlet argued that while tea-drinking was acceptable for the
middle and upper-classes, it should be prevented among 'persons of an inferior
rank and mean abilities'. Although his argument started reasonably, pointing
out that a cup of tea alone was an inadequate breakfast for those who had to do
hard work, it soon descended into a tirade based, like Hanway's original essay,
on the belief that the social habits of the poor must be controlled for the sake
of the rich. He claimed that the practice of tea-drinking in the afternoon
among working class women meant that they were 'neglecting their spinning
knitting etc spending what their husbands are labouring hard for, their
children are in rags, gnawing a brown crust, while these gossips are canvassing
over the affairs of the whole town, making free with the good name and
reputaion of their superiors.' He believed that it also encouraged these
'artful husseys' to drink spirits and to complain about their husbands, and
urged innocent people to hold out against their malign influence.
Unsurprisingly, this author was set against the practice of providing servants
with an allowance for tea.

But not everybody
followed Hanway's argument. The eminent intellectual Dr Samuel Johnson, a
devotee of tea, so disagreed with Hanway's 1757 essay that he published a
hilariously satirical review of it in the Literary Magazine, a monthly journal.

Johnson started of
by admitting that Hanway should expect little justice, since Johnson himself
was 'a hardened and shameless tea-drinker, who has for twenty years diluted his
meals with only the infusion of this fascinating plant, whose kettle scarcely
has time to cool, who with Tea amuses the evening, with Tea solaces the midnights,
and with Tea welcomes the morning'. He then poured scorn on Hanway's suggestion
that women are less beautiful than they once were, before considering the claim
that tea-drinking has led to an increase in nervous disorders. Johnson
suggested that rather than blaming tea, one ought to blame the 'general langour
[that] is theeffect of general luxury, of general idleness', because those who
are idle get no exercise, and are thus susceptible to nervous disorders. He
argued that there is only a link with tea-drinking because tea-drinking is
common among those who are already 'idle and luxurious'. Johnson was also
perceptive enough to note that often tea-drinking was just an excuse for
bringing people together: 'a pretence for assembling to prattle, for interrupting
business' - but unlike tea's critics, who saw such gatherings as dangerous
(particularly among the working classes), Johnson saw no harm in it. Thus he
has much in common with many modern tea-drinkers, who delight in getting
together with a cuppa for a gossip and a giggle.

Jonas Hanway was as
furious with Johnson's review as Johnson had been scathing about Hanway's
original work. He wrote a response to Johnson's review in the Gazateer, and in
turn Johnson was moved to respond to this, again in the Literary Magazine, the
only occasion on which Johnson was ever moved to reply to an attacker.

Hanway would have
been wise not to have taken up his pen again, for Johnson's reply to him was so
witty and effective that it demolished once again Hanway's arguments. Thus
ended the spat between Jonas Hanway and Dr Samuel Johnson, but the arguments
about tea raged for years. As late as 1826, a London tea dealer (admittedly
biased by his profession) published a book which included a defence of tea from
the claim that it caused 'nervous disorders'. With some insight, he questioned
the medical basis of these disorders, and suggested that they might be cured
not by giving up tea, but by the sufferers taking up regular exercise, eating
healthy food and getting plenty of sleep. He noted that tea 'quenches the most
burning thirst, and cheers the spirits without heating the blood... I am
inclined to believe that the man who could willingly forgo the pleasures of the
tea-table and society around it, wants that kind of congenial spirit without
which life would be a burden, and the world a dreary waste...'. In conclusion
he pointed out the government provided tea to the Navy, without any concern
that 'our future enemies will have to contend with bilious and nervous sailors,
instead of hearts of oak, and sinews of iron'. The arguments are now over once
and for all, since it has now been shown scientifically that drinking four cups
of tea a day can be beneficial to health.

Given the
insistence of some eighteenth-century authors of a link between tea-drinking
and 'dram-drinking', it is somewhat ironic then that tea-drinking was actually
being used as a weapon in the armoury of the temperance movement - a movement
that was primarily an attempt by sections of the ruling classes to get the
working classes to give up alcohol. Virtually since historical records began,
alcoholic drinks had been a central part of the diet of men, women and even
children in Britain. There was some sense in this: weak alcoholic drinks could
quench the drinker's thirst without the risk of contracting disease from
contaminated water. But the eighteenth century saw a rise in the popularity of
strong wines such as port among the upper classes, and of spirits, particularly
gin, among the working classes.

In the nineteenth
century there was the inevitable backlash, inspired primarily by upper class
fears that gin-sodden working class would be difficult to control and unable to
work. Thus a movement developed in support of temperance - the drinking of
alcohol only in moderation, if at all. Tea was useful to thetemperance movement
because it offered a refreshing, thirst-quenching alternative to alcohol that
was cheap and (made of course from boiled water) safe to drink. Preachers of
temperance urged people to sign a pledge to give up drinking alcohol, and
millions did so (although merely signing the paper was no guarantee of a future
of abstinence). Often this took place at mass meetings, and tea would be served
to those who attended. The Methodist church was at the forefront of the
temperance movement and often served tea at its meetings, rather ironically
since its founder, John Wesley, had been so anti-tea.

During the 1830s
the movement was so successful that businessmen recognised that there was a gap
in the market for catering outlets that sold non-alcoholic refreshments - a
temperance alternative to pubs and inns. A great many new cafes and coffee
houses opened up. Though in principal similar to the coffee houses of the
seventeenth century, they were different in that these new businesses catered
to the needs of ordinary people, not just wealthy men. From the 1880s, tea
rooms and tea shops became popular and fashionable, particularly among women,
for whom they offered a most welcome and respectable environment in which to
meet, chat and relax, without the need to be accompanied by a man.

Later in the nineteenth century then, going out to a tea shop became a
popular pastime for women. But tea remained a beverage that was mostly drunk at
home. Tea was drunk at breakfast by all social classes. Among the rich, it
would typically accompany a vast spread of bread or toast, cold meats and pies,
eggs and fish. Of course some families favoured a lighter breakfast, and lower
down the social scale this was a necessity rather than an option. Poor families
usually began the day with a cup of tea, as well as bread and butter, or perhaps
porridge or gruel. Tea was then drunk at regular intervals throughout the day.

Tea features often
in the work of the great nineteenth century author and social commentator
Charles Dickens. His books make it clear that tea-drinking was ubiquitous among
the working classes, and through the eyes of Pip, the hero of Great
Expectations, we can sense Dickens' affection for it: '...we returned into the
Castle, where we found Miss Skiffins preparing tea. The responsibility of
making toast was delegated to the Aged [an elderly man]... The Aged prepared
such a haystack of buttered toast, that I could scarcely see him over it...
while Miss Skiffins prepared such a jorum of tea, that the pig in the back
premises became strongly excited... We ate the whole of the toast, and drank
tea in proportion, and it was delightful to see how warm and greasy we all got
after it.' On the other hand, in Oliver Twist, Dickens uses the precise
tea-making ceremony of Mrs Corney, the matron of workhouse, to display her
self-satisfaction, and she is wooed over a cup of tea by the tyrannical and
grasping beadle, Mr Bumble, who, when she has she left the room, inspects her
tea-making equipment to check that it is genuine silver.

While tea was part of the staple diet of the poor, among the rich
tea-drinking was evolving into an elaborate social occasion. Afternoon teas
probably had their roots in the ladies tea-parties of the seventeenth
centuries, but evolved during the eighteenth century into something of a
national institution.

Tradition has it
that afternoon tea was 'invented' by Anna Maria, the wife of the seventh Duke
of Bedford, who in 1841 started drinking tea and having a bite to eat in the
mid-afternoon, to tide her over during the long gap between lunch (eaten at
about 1 o'clock) and dinner (eaten at around 7 o'clock). This swiftly developed
into a social occasion, and soon the Duchess was inviting guests to join her for
afternoon tea at 5 o'clock. It did not become instantly popular elsewhere
though, partly because in fashionable circles dinner was eaten earlier, leaving
less of a gap to be filled by afternoon tea. But by the 1860s the fashion for
afternoon tea had become widespread. Such teas were elegant affairs, with tea
drunk from the best china and small amounts of food presented perfectly on
little china plates. On offer might be bread and butter, scones and cakes, and
sandwiches with the crusts cut off.

Contemporary
manuals on etiquette and good housekeeping are full of advice on how to conduct
a correct afternoon tea. The idea of needing an instruction book in order to enjoy
a cup of tea and a biscuit with some friends seems rather alarming these days,
but although nineteenth century afternoon teas were elaborate affairs from our
point of view, in those days they were considered relatively informal
occasions. Invitations were issued verbally or by note, and rather than
attending for the entire duration guests were free to pop in when it suited
them and likewise leave when they wanted to. The hostess would pour the tea,
but it was the responsibility of the men to hand the cups round. If there were
no men present, this job fell to the daughters of the hostess or other young
women present (goodness know what happened if there were no men and no
daughters available!). There was a fashion for women to wear tea gowns, but
these were softer and less restrictive than evening gowns, and it was not
always deemed necessary for women to wear gloves. Nonetheless many did, and the
author of The Etiquette of Modern Society points out that a thoughtful hostess
should always provide biscuits with tea, since these can be eaten more easily
than sandwiches without removing one's gloves.

Some poorer households also adopted the practice of afternoon tea, and
in some areas women pooled their resources and equipment in order to make such
occasions affordable. But more common among the working classes was 'high tea'.
During the seventeenth and early eighteenth centuries, when most people worked
in agriculture, the working classes tended to have the main meal of their day
at midday, with a much lighter supper late in the evening. But after the
industrial revolution, more and more people were employed for long shifts in
factories or mines, and hot midday meals were thus less convenient. They were
also not approriate for the increasing numbers of children who were at school
during the day. The custom developed of having a high tea in the late
afternoon, at the end of the working day, consisting of strong tea, and hearty,
hot food. Unlike afternoon tea, high tea was the main meal of the day, rather
than a stop-gap between lunch and dinner.

By the beginning of
the twentieth century, there could be no doubt about the importance of tea to
the British people. This was acknowledged by the government during the First
World War. Tea was not initially rationed, but tea prices began to rise as
a result of ships being sunk by German submarines, and so the government took
over the importation of tea and controlled prices. During the Second World War,
the government took even more drastic action to safeguard this essential
morale-booster. Just two days after war broke out, it took control of all tea
stocks, and ordered that the vast reserves then stored in London must be
dispersed to warehouses outside the capital in case of bombing. When during
1940 enemy blockades prevented ships from getting through, the Minstry of Food
introduced a ration of 2oz of tea per person per week for those over the age of
five. This was not a lot, enough for two or three cups a day of rather weak
tea. But there was extra tea for those in the armed forces, and on the domestic
front for those in vital jobs such as firemen and steel workers. Tea was also sent
in Red Cross parcels to British prisoners of war abroad.

The end of the war in 1945 did not signal an immediate end to rationing,
and tea remained rationed until October 1952. It was shortly after this that
the tea bag, an American invention, began to make
an impact on British tea-drinking habits. It was to revolutionise the tea
industry, and today 96 per cent of all tea sold in Britain is in tea bag form.

Rationing by no
means diminished the British enthusiasm for tea. In January 1946, the author
and journalist George Orwell published an essay called 'A Nice Cup of Tea' in
the Evening Standard newspaper, calling tea 'one of the main stays of
civilsation in this country', and listing his 11 'golden rules' for tea
making.He acknowledged the controversial nature of some of them - such as his
insistence that the tea should be poured and then the milk added, and that
tea should always be drunk without sugar - but he also offered sensible advice
to make the 2oz ration go as far as possible, such as using water that is still
at the point of boiling, in order to make the strongest brew from the least
tea. Orwell also used the ritual of tea-making as a device in his fiction. In
his novel Keep the Aspidistra Flying, the main character, Gordon Comstock,
makes tea secretly in his rented room as a means to undermine the oppressive
authority of his landlady, who does not allow it. But the ritual and secret
delight of Comstock's evening cup of tea also reveals something about himself:
Comstock, an aspiring poet, has attempted to reject everything that he
associates with bourgois society - but he cannot reject its favourite drink.

Certainly for much of the twentieth century, methods of preparing tea
were still the subject of some snobbery: in a letter to Nancy Mitford (a social
commentator and great satirist of upper class behaviour), the author Evelyn
Waugh mentions a mutual friend who uses the expression 'rather milk in first'
to express condemnation of those lower down the social scale. Nowadays the
'milk in first or tea in first' debate is altogether more light-hearted, but
nonetheless everyone has his or her preferred method of making tea. Tea has for
centuries been a beverage at the very heart of social life in Britain - for
millions of people today, just for Dr Johnson nearly 250 years ago, tea amuses
the evenings, solaces the midnights and welcomes the mornings.

Saturday, 1 February 2014

Catherine of
Braganza

In the contemporary era tea is so much associated with the British way
of life that it can come as a surprise to learn that it owes much of its
popularity here to a foreign princess. While it is not true to say that
Catherine of Braganza, the queen-consort of Charles II of England, actually
introduced tea to Britain, she certainly had much to do with it becoming a
fashionable and widely drunk beverage.

Portuguese traders
imported it to their homeland from the East, and its high price and exoticism
helped it to become very fashionable in aristocratic circles and at the royal
court,where Catherine grew up. By the mid-seventeenth century, it was very
popular there.Tea had also gained popularity in elite society in Holland,
through Dutch trade in the East, and in neighbouring countries. But at
this stage, Britain somewhat lagged behind. The famous English diarist Samuel
Pepys first mentioned drinking tea in his diary entry for 25 September 1660. He
wrote that he had been discussing foreign affairs with some friends, 'And
afterwards did send for a Cupp of Tee (a China drink) of which I never drank
before'. Since Pepys was a member of the wealthy and fashionable London set,
his failure to mention tea earlier suggests that it was still unusual at this
time. This was soon to change. Just a few months before Pepys was writing, in
May 1660, Charles II had been restored to the throne after the Commonwealth
administration which had been set up by Oliver Cromwell in 1649 collapsed under
the weight of its own unpopularity. But Charles II inherited many debts from
that government, and soon ran up new ones of his own, and so was desperately
short of cash. One solution to this was to marry a wealthy foreign princess and
to demand with her a great deal of money or goods as a dowry. After some
negotiation, it was agreed that he would marry Catherine, and that her father
King John IV of Portugal would provide with her several ships full of luxury
goods, some as gifts and some which could be sold to pay off Charles II's
debts. These goods included a chest of tea, the favourite drink at the
Portuguese court.

Catherine arrived
in Portsmouth on 13 May 1662. It had been a long and stormy crossing, and as
soon as she arrived she asked for a cup of tea. So rare was it at this time
that there was none available; the princess was offered a glass of ale instead.
Not surprisingly, this did not make her feel any better, and for a time she was
forced by illness to retire to her bedchamber. Eventually though Catherine and
Charles II were married, on 21 May 1662. Initially Catherine, a deeply pious
Catholic who had been schooled in a convent, found it difficult to fit in at
the bawdy and fun-loving English court. But over time she established herself,
and as the pre-eminent woman in the kingdom became something of a trend-setter.
Although she adopted English fashions, she continued to prefer the cuisine of
her native Portugal - including tea. Soon her taste for tea had caused a fad at
the royal court. This then spread to aristocratic circles and then to the
wealthier classes. In 1663 the poet and politician Edmund Waller wrote a poem
in honour of the queen for her birthday:

Venus her Myrtle,
Phoebus has his bays;
Tea both excels, which she vouchsafes to praise.
The best of Queens, the best of herbs, we owe
To that bold nation which the way did show
To the fair region where the sun doth rise,
Whose rich productions we so justly prize.
The Muse's friend, tea does our fancy aid,
Regress those vapours which the head invade,
And keep the palace of the soul serene,
Fit on her birthday to salute the Queen.

As well as being important to the growth of tea's popularity in Britain,
the reign of Charles II was also crucial in laying the foundations for the
growth of the British tea trade (and of British trade in the east generally).

The East India Company,
the commercial company that enjoyed a monopoly on trade with the 'Indies' (that
is, lands east of Africa and west of South America) was highly favoured by
Charles II. This was not wholly surprising, since the Company had showered him
with gifts upon his restoration to the throne. Charles confirmed its monopoly,
and also extended it to give the Company unprecedented powers to occupy by
military force places with which they wished to trade (so long as the people
there were not Christians). Further, another gift to Charles II in Catherine's
dowry was Bombay in India (now called Mumbai). This valuable port was made over
to the East India Company,
for an annual rent of £10 in gold. In time it became the Company's Far East
trading headquarters and was to prove important to the tea trade. It is
certainly fitting that when in 1664 the Company opened its first trading point
in Macau, the merchants sent a silver case of tea and cinnamon oil as a gift to
Charles II and Queen Catherine.

The marriage of
Queen Catherine and Charles II in fact was not an altogether happy union. They
had no children together, a source of great heartache for them both, and made
worse for Catherine by the fact that Charles had several illegitimate children
from a series of mistresses. Further, Catherine was a Roman Catholic, which
occasionally made her a victim of popular anti-Catholic feeling. Although she
remained in England for some years after her husband's death in 1685, she
eventually retired to Portugal, where she died in 1705. But while though
Catherine's experience as queen of England may not have been an entirely
successful or happy one in many ways, it is this young foreign princess whom we
have to thank for the development of the British taste for tea.

Friday, 20 December 2013

The London Tea Auction

The London Tea Auction was a grand tradition that lasted 300 years. From
the very first event in 1679, until the last sale on 29 June 1998, the London
Tea Auction was a regular event that made London the centre of the
international tea trade. The first auctions were held by the East
India Company, which at the time held the monopoly for the
import of tea (and other goods) from China and India. They were held at the
headquarters of the Company on Leadenhall Street. The building was decorated
with reliefs of ships, sailors, fish and a large coat of arms, and swiftly
became known as East India House.

Auctions were held roughly quarterly, and tea was sold 'by the candle'.
This meant that rather than allowing bidding to go on for an unlimited length
of time, a candle was lit at the beginning of the sale of each lot, and when an
inch of the candle had burnt away, the hammer fell and the sale was ended. In
the late seventeenth century tea was not always the star of the show, as the
auctions sold other goods, primarily fabrics, which the Company had brought
back from the East. But by the early eighteenth century, tea was so popular
that the London Tea Auction came into its own.

It was something of
a riotous affair. An anonymous tea dealer, writing in 1826, described the noise
and confusion of an auction taking place at East India House: 'To the
uninitiated a Tea sale appears to be a mere arena in which the comparative
strength of the lungs of a portion of his Majesty´s subjects are to be tried.
No one could for an instant suspect the real nature of the business for which
the assemblage was congregated...'

Things changed in 1834, when the East India Company ceased to be a
commercial enterprise, and tea became a 'free trade' commodity. The tea auction
had to find a new home - and it was moved from the splendour of East India
House, via a brief sojourn at a dance studio, to the newly built London
Commercial Salerooms on Mincing Lane. Within a few years, various tea merchants
followed the auction and established offices of Mincing Lane, earning it the
nickname the 'Street of Tea'.

By the middle of
the nineteenth century tea was such a popular beverage that auctions took place
monthly, and then weekly, and the tradition of selling 'by the candle' was
replaced by more practical methods. Tea was sent from India, China, Ceylon (now
called Sri Lanka) and Africa for sale at the auction, and as the Auction grew
busier and busier, a practice developed of devoting particular days of the week
to the sale of teas from each individual country. By the 1950s, a third of all
the world's tea was bought through the auction. Once purchased, the tea was
sent from the London warehouses either direct to retailers where it was sold
loose, or to companies which specialised in blending and packaging. These
companies then sold the tea ready packed under various brand names, offering a
wide range of choice to tea-drinkers.

Except for breaks necessitated by the First and Second World Wars, the
London Tea Auction continued to be held regularly until almost the end of the twentieth
century, though its location moved first to Plantation House, then to Sir John
Lyon House, and finally in 1990 to the London Chamber of Commerce. Yet its
business gradually declined, particularly after India, Sri Lanka and Kenya
became independent states in 1947, 1948 and 1963 respectively. The owners of
many tea estates preferred to sell their teas as soon as possible after
manufacture, rather than go through the costly and timely process of shipping
them to England for auction.

To meet this demand
auctions were set up in locations including Calcutta, Colombo and Mombassa, and
they gradually eroded sales in London. The decline of the London auction was
further hastened by new methods of international trading, such as sales via the
telephone and the internet. The methods of the auction became increasingly
outdated, and it was decided that the sale on 29 June 1998 would be the last.
The proceeds of the final auction went to charity, and a grand City tradition
came to an end.

Saturday, 14 December 2013

Boston Tea Party

Nowadays tea is
thoroughly associated with the British, and taking time for a cup of tea is
considered by millions to be a moment of calm and enjoyment in our hectic
lives. It seems a little incongruous to remember that a little over 250 years
ago, tea was such a hot political issue in America that it led to event that
changed history forever. This was the infamous Boston Tea Party, a protest
against tea duties in December 1773 that sparked off the American War of
Independence and so eventually led to the United States of America becoming an
independent nation instead of a group of British colonies.

During the eighteenth century, tea drinking was as popular in Britain’s
American colonies as it was in Britain itself. Legally, all tea imported into
America had to be shipped from Britain, and all tea imported into Britain had
to be shipped in by the East India Company. However, for most of
the eighteenth century, theEast India Company was not allowed to export
directly to America. But during the 1770s the East India Company ran into
financial problems: illegal tea smuggling into
Britain was vastly reducing the amount of tea being bought from the Company.
This led to a downturn in its profits, as well as an increase in its stockpile
of unsold tea. In an attempt to revive its flagging fortunes and avoid bankruptcy,
the Company asked the British government for permission to export tea direct to
America, a move that would enable it to get rid of its surplus stock of tea.
The Company actually owed the government £1 million, so the government had no
desire to let the Company go bankrupt. Thus in 1773 the Tea Act was passed,
granting the Company’s wish, and allowing a duty of 3d per lb to be levied on
the exports to America.

The British
government did not anticipate this being a problem: by being exported directly
to America, the cost of tea there would actually become cheaper, and 3d per lb
was considerably less duty than was paid on tea destined for the British
market. But it had underestimated the strength of the American resistance to
being taxed at all by their British colonial masters. The issue of the taxation
in America had been hotly debated for some years. Many Americans objected on
principle to being taxed by a Parliament which did not represent them. Instead,
they wanted to raise taxes themselves to fund their own administration. But
successive British governments reserved the right to tax the colonies, and
various bungled attempts to impose taxation had hardened American opposition.
In the later 1760s, opposition took the form of boycotts of taxed goods. As a
replacement for them, the Americans either bought smuggled goods or attempted
to find substitutes made from native products.

These included ‘Labrador tea’, which was made from the leaves of a plant
that flourished in the colonies, and ‘Balsamic hyperion’, made from dried raspberry
leaves. The successful boycott of such a popular domestic product as tea was
largely made possible by the active support of American women, who were on the
whole responsible for household purchases. An anonymous American commentator
writing some decades later noted that by abandoning the use of imported tea,
‘American ladies exhibited a spirit of patriotism and self-devotedness highly
honourable to their sex’.

In 1770, the British government repealed most of the import duties -
with the exception of the duty on tea, which remained at 3d per lb. For a time
this calmed down the situation in the colonies, although taxed tea continued to
be boycotted. But the maintenance of duty in the Tea Act of 1773 reawakened the
anger of the Americans. They were further incensed by the decision of
Parliament that the East India Company would have a monopoly
on the distribution of tea in America, using its own agents instead of
established American tea merchants. This seemed like an attempt to put
patriotic Americans out of business.

The colonists were united in their decision to resist the new
arrangements, and decided to refuse to pay the tax on tea. Regardless of the
opposition, the East India Company pressed ahead with its plans, and in autumn
1773 four ships, Dartmouth, Eleanor, Beaver and William,
set sail for Boston with their precious cargo of tea. In the weeks that these
ships were sailing, the American opposition stepped up a gear.

The Massachusetts Gazette reported a meeting in early
November when the people of Boston resolved that no one would import any tea
that was liable for duty, and that anyone who aided or abetted the East
India Company would be considered an ‘enemy of America’.
Tempers were clearly running high, and there were further riotous public
meetings against the tax, and even attacks on the warehouses for which the tea
was destined.

When Dartmouth reached America on 28 November 1773, it
was faced with the resolve of the townspeople that the tea must not be brought
ashore or the duty paid. But the customs officers completed the necessary
paperwork for the import of the tea, after which the ship could not legally set
sail for England with the tea still on board. A few days later Eleanor arrived,
followed by Beaver, which had been delayed by an outbreak of
smallpox onboard. William had run aground and was stranded
near Cape Cod. So it was that these three ships languished in the harbour at
Griffin’s Wharf in Boston, waiting for the situation to be resolved.

But there was deadlock. The townspeople would not allow the tea to be
brought ashore without an agreement that no duty would be paid on it. The
Governor of Massachusetts, Thomas Hutchinson (whose sons were to have been
agents of the East India Company for the distribution
of the tea), refused to let the ships leave port without paying duty on the
tea. An armed guard of patriots was posted at the wharf to prevent the tea
coming ashore, while a naval blockade of the harbour prevented the ships from
leaving. Mass meetings were held by the resistance leaders, Samuel Adams and
Josiah Quincy, and the Bostonians were further buoyed up by messages of support
which they received from all over New England.

On 16 December,
perhaps as many as 7,000 local people met at the Old South Meeting House.
Francis Rotch, the American owner of two of the ships, attended the meeting. He
was in an unfortunate position: unwilling to risk the wrath of his countrymen
by bringing the tea ashore, but yet knowing that if he ordered the ships to set
sail illegally he risked them being confiscated by the navy or even sunk. In an
attempt to resolve the situation, Rotch was sent in person to see Governor
Hutchinson, to demand from him a pass for the ships to leave port, with the tea
still onboard. The Governor, who was at his country house seven miles from
Boston, refused, and Rotch returned to the meeting with this news. George
Hewes, who took part in the Tea Party, remembered that Rotch’s announcement
created a great patriotic stir at the meeting; men cried out '"Let every
man do his duty, and be true to his country”; and there was a general huzza for
Griffin’s Wharf’. The townspeople were faced with a stalemate, and so decided
upon drastic action.

In the early evening of 16 December, a band of men, some disguised as
Mohawk American Indians (Hewes recorded that he darkened his face with soot),
assembled on a hill near the wharf. Whooping Indian-style war cries, they
marched to the wharf, where they boarded the ships one after another, hoisted
the tea on board deck, split open the chests - 342 in total - and threw all the
tea into the sea. The whole affair took about three hours, and it was not a
violent protest - the ships’ crews attested that nothing had been damaged or
destroyed except the tea - and the protesters swept the decks clean afterwards.
The Massachusetts Gazette even reported that when it was realised that a
padlock that had been broken was the personal property of one of the ships’
captains, a replacement was procured and sent to him. Hewes also recorded that
any man caught attempting to steal any of the tea for personal consumption was
punished by the Bostonians. The following morning large quantities of tea were
still floating in the harbour waters, so to prevent any being salvaged, men
went out in rowing boats and beat the tea beneath the surface of the water with
their oars. A joke went round for months afterwards that fish taken from
American waters tasted strongly of tea.

This Tea Party sparked off other protests: tea being shipped to New York
and Philadelphia was sent back to London, while tea off-loaded at Charleston
was left to rot in the warehouses. In retaliation, the British government
passed five laws in early 1774 that became known as the Intolerable Acts.
Although intended primarily to punish the people of Massachusetts (the Acts
included closing the port of Boston until the tea was paid for, restricting
town meetings and giving the British-appointed governor more power), in the
event the Acts played a key role in uniting the 13 American colonies against
British rule. In September 1774, representatives of the colonies, including
Samuel Adams, one of the Bostonian resistance leaders, met at the First
Continental Congress to plan common measures of resistance against the Acts.
The united resistance of the colonies would lead to the American Revolution and
the Declaration of Independence, which was signed in July 1776, just three
years after the Boston Tea Party.

One anonymous
balladeer wrote a song to commemorate the historic events in Boston, ending in
the verses:

Quick as thought
the ships were boarded
Hatches bust and chests displayed;
Axe and hammers help afforded,
What a glorious crash they made.

Quick into the deep descended,
Cursed weed of China’s coast;
Thus at once our fears were ended
Freemen’s rights shall ne’er be lost.

Wednesday, 4 December 2013

The Tea Clippers

The age of the tea
clippers lasted only two decades, but this brief reign was marked by such
excitement and enthusiasm for the ships and their cargo that it has gone down
in history, famed for its glamour and romance.

During the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, the East India Company had the monopoly on
British trade with China and India.Because no other company could legally
import goods from these countries, the Company was rarely in a hurry to
transport its merchandise. Rather, its priority was to minimise costs by
carrying as much as possible on each ship. This meant that its ships - known as
East Indiamen - were enormous, strong and very slow. By 1800, the average East
Indiaman could carry 1,200 tons of cargo. The trading pattern for China tea
usually meant the East Indiamen set sail from Britain in January, sailed round
the Cape of Good Hope at the southern-most tip of Africa and arrived in China in
September.

They would load up
that year's tea harvest and set off again, and depending on the wind and
weather, aim to arrive back in Britain by the following September. So even with
favourable sailing conditions, the round trip took almost two years, and if
anything went wrong it could take a lot longer.

But by 1834 the Company had lost its trading monopolies, and tea and had
become a freely traded item. The Company, having no more use for its great
ships, sold them off, and many were bought by merchants or their captains, who
continued to plough the seas between Britain and China plying the tea trade.
But now that tea could be traded freely, a few canny sailors began to realise
that whoever brought the tea from each new harvest to Britain first stood to
make the most money.

This was partly
because of practicalities - if you were home first, you could sell your
shipment of tea before your competitors even arrived - and partly because
consumers in the nineteenth century believed that the fresher and
earlier-picked the tea, the better the resulting drink. The lumbering East
Indiamen seemed less appealing, and tea traders wanted faster, sleeker ships to
bring their precious cargo back. Nonetheless, this idea only caught on in
Britain slowly, and while the 1840s saw a few faster ships launched, for the
time being many merchants remained satisfied with the slow but reliable East
Indiamen.

In fact it was the
Americans who pioneered the first clipper ships. Based on an earlier type of
ship called the Baltimore clipper, they were fast and slender, with a narrow
hull that was deeper at the back than at the front, and acres of sails on tall
masts. Some had as many as six tiers of sails to a mast, and a total of 35
sails. They earned their name from the way that they 'clipped off' the miles.

The first true tea clipper wasRainbow, designed by John W.
Griffiths and launched in 1845. She made the journey from New York to Canton in
102 days - taking more than two weeks off the previous record for that trip.
Their development was given another boost by the discovery of gold in
California in 1848 and in Australia in 1851 - people rushing to seek their
fortunes wanted ships that would transport them as fast as possible.

Up until 1849 the use of clippers in the tea trade was largely confined
to America. But in 1849 the British Navigation Laws were repealed, meaning that
American ships were allowed to carry tea from China to Britain for the first
time. The first clipper to take advantage of this was Oriental,
which arrived at West India Dock in London on 3 December 1850 - just 97 days
after leaving Hong Kong. British merchants were horrified - this was three
times as fast as the East Indiamen. They resolved to build their own clippers
to rival the Americans, and the first British tea clipper, Stornaway,
was built in Aberdeen in 1850.

After this, tea clippers were designed and built in Britain throughout
the 1850s and 1860s; they had a narrower beam than their American equivalents,
making them less powerful in heavy weather, but faster in lighter winds. There
was a great spirit of competition between the British and American ships plying
the tea trade, but to begin with the Americans had the edge. Then in 1851 the
British ship owner Richard Green announced that he was fed up with hearing
about the dismal prospects for British shipping since the repeal of the
Navigation Laws, and built the aptly named clipperChallenger, with the
stated intention of beating the American ships. Leaving Canton for London in
1852 loaded with tea, she fell in with the American clipper Challenge,
a much larger, older ship, already greatly admired for her speed. Large sums
were bet on which would make it to London first, and in the

event the British Challenger beat Challenge to
the docks by two days, amid much jubilation about the British success.

The time of the international races was relatively short lived though,
because after 1855 the American ships gradually ceased to participate in the
English tea trade. But even without the Anglo-American rivalry, the competitive
spirit continued. It was really ignited in 1853, when new ports in China were
opened up for trade. These included Fouchow, which was much closer to the tea
producing areas than Canton, the port used previously. As a result the tea
could be loaded onboard earlier and fresher, and the clippers could set off in
late May or early June - sometimes not even taking time to complete the
official paperwork - racing back to Britain come hell or high water.

They thundered down
through the South China Sea and into the Indian Ocean, then raced to round the
southern-most tip of Africa at the Cape of Good Hope. Then it was north across
the vast Atlantic, past the Azores, through the English Channel and into the
Thames estuary, from where they would be towed down the Thames by tugs.

The cargo of the winning ship could earn a premium of up to sixpence per
lb - and so the captain and crew were rewarded by the owners of the cargo.But
the races were about more than just financial gain: the crews, about 40 men on
each clipper, were expert sailors, proud of their ships, who delighted in
competing against each other. Without their enthusiasm the races would never
have happened, since getting the ship home as fast as possible required
complete dedication from the crew, who sacrificed rest for the excitement of
the race. The lively rivalry between crews is exemplified in the story of a
gilded model cockerel which was exhibited on the clipper Thermopylae.
Other clipper crews took this as an affront, because at the time Thermopylae had
yet to win a clipper race. One night at the harbour in Fouchow, when her
officers and crew were below, a sailor from the rival clipper Taiping jumped
overboard, swam across to Thermopylae, climbed aboard and stole the cockerel.
Discovering their loss, the crew of the Thermopylae was
furious, and there were a number of angry (and even violent) incidents between
them and rival crews.

The clipper races
quickly caught the public's imagination - the speed and rivalry were thrilling
while the ships themselves were as beautiful as they were fast. The ships would
sail past certain marker points, and then telegrams would be despatched to
Britain with news of their progress. When the time for the arrival of the first
clippers grew near, the race would be a central topic of conversation, and
crowds gathered at the docks to watch the arrival of the ships (the masts and
bulwarks of which were all painted differently, to make the ships
distinguishable from each other), greeting the winner with great cheers. Such
was the public enthusiasm for the clipper races that large amounts of money
were bet on which ship would be home first.

The greatest and most famous clipper race took pace in 1866. 10 clippers
bound for London set out from Fouchow on 28 May. Fastest away were Taeping, Fiery
Cross and Serica, but Ariel swiftly
gained on them. So evenly matched were these four ships and their crews that
the clippers were frequently within sight of each other as they raced across
the Indian Ocean, round the Cape of Good Hope and north across the great
Atlantic.

On 29 August the four were dead level at the Azores, but as they entered
the Channel Ariel and the Taeping pulled
away, the ships magnificent in full sail.

Practically the entire population of London was electrified by the news
of the race - huge sums had been bet on the ships, while the crews of Fiery
Cross and Serica had wagered a month's pay against
each other - and the merchants and dealers on Mincing Lane, the centre of the
London tea trade, were beside themselves with excitement. At the Thames estuary
the two ships were still neck and neck, but tugs were needed to tow the ships
down the river to dock, and Taeping was fortunate enough to
pick a faster tug. With this slender advantage Taeping reached her
berth just 20 minutes ahead of Ariel - an amazingly small gap
considering the journey had taken 99 days. (Almost as amazing - Serica docked
just a few hours after the winning pair, on the same tide, and Fiery
Cross less than 48 hours later.) Despite Taeping's tiny
lead, in the spirit of sportsmanship the race was declared a dead-heat, and the
ships' owners agreed to divide the winner's premium, while the two crews shared
their bonus.

Of course, life on the tea clippers was not just about the excitement of
racing and the glamour of being the first ship home. There was serious work to
be done onboard, and loading the tea was an art form in itself. The cargo
needed to be packed incredibly tightly, not just to carry as much tea as
possible, but also to prevent the potential hazard of the cargo shifting as the
ship sailed, which could have thrown the ship off balance and caused disaster.
The Chinese dockers packed the chests in tiers, sometimes hammering them into
place with great wooden mallets. It was skilled work carried out at great
speed, and equally skilled were the English dockers whose job it was to unload
the cargo at the other end of the journey.

The reign of the tea clippers was to prove as brief as it was glorious.
In November 1869 the Suez Canal opened, creating a navigable passage between
the Far East and the Mediterranean. Overnight, it became economically viable
for steamships to ply the China tea trade. Previously, the amount of coal the
steamers needed to carry to complete the journey to and from China round the
Cape of Good Hope left little space for a bulky cargo like tea. But sailing via
the Suez Canal, the journey length was cut dramatically and the steamships
became a more efficient option than the clippers, which could not use the
Canal. The plodding steamships had none of the glamour of the clippers and
their brave and skilled crews, and while there was rivalry between the
steamers, it never caught gripped the public imagination like the clipper
races.

Happily, one great
tea clipper has survived and is now in dry dock at Greenwich in London. Cutty
Sark, launched from the Clyde on 22 November 1869, was one of the last tea
clippers to be constructed. Built for John 'White Hat' Willis, she was intended
to win the annual clipper race, although in fact she never beat her biggest
rival, Thermopylae. The decline of the clipper tea trade meant that Cutty
Sark only carried tea until 1877, but she survived many later incarnations, and
is now the only remaining tea clipper in the world. Small to modern eyes, Cutty
Sark is nonetheless breathtakingly beautiful, and a visit offers a fascinating
insight into the life of a tea clipper.

Saturday, 23 November 2013

The East India Company

The East India
Company was perhaps the most powerful commercial organisation that the world has ever
seen. In its heyday it not only had a monopoly on British trade with India and
the Far East, but it was also responsible for the government of much of the
vast Indian sub-continent. Both of these factors mean that the East India
Company (or, to call it by its proper name, the British East India Company) was
crucial to the history of the tea trade.

Before 1600,
Portugal controlled most European trade with India and the Far East (an area
known then as the Indies). But in 1600 Queen Elizabeth I gave a royal charter
to a new trading company, the East India Company, by which it was given a
monopoly over all British trade with the Indies. The Company soon began
competing with the Portuguese, as did later East India Companies, set up in the
Netherlands, Denmark and France (though for ease, the term East India Company
shall here be used to describe the British East India Company). The East India
Company's first major base was in western India, where it found a rich source
of exotic textiles and other produce, which could be exported back to Britain
or taken further east to exchange for spices.

The Company
successfully weathered the various political storms going on in Britain in the
seventeenth century. Oliver Cromwell provided the merchants with a new charter
after Charles I was deposed and the Commonwealth established in 1649. Then when
Charles II was restored to the throne in 1660, the Company ingratiated itself
with him in order to protect its interests. In fact, Charles II actually
extended its privileges to allow the Company to take military action to
establish itself in places where it wished to trade.

But where does tea fit into all this? Charles II's Queen, Catherine of Braganza, was a Portuguese
princess who had grown up with a taste for tea. When she married Charles
and came to England, tea gradually became a fashionable drink in courtly and
aristocratic circles.This was made possible by the East India Company, which in
1664 placed its first order for tea - for 100lbs of China tea to be shipped
from Java for import into Britain. This steady supply continued until 1678,
when an import of 4,713lbs swamped the market until 1685, when 12,070lbs was
imported, swamping the market again. This pattern continued until the end of
the century. But the eighteenth century was very different. Tea drinking really
took hold as an activity for the whole population, and the East India Company's
imports rocketed. By 1750, annual imports had reached 4,727,992lbs.

In fact though, tea was still very expensive, partly because of the
Company's monopoly on the trade and partly because of high taxes imposed upon
it. To satisfy the demand of the less wealthy, an enormous amount of tea was
smuggled in and sold illicitly - some was even brought in on the East Company's
own ships, by crew members who then sold it on to smugglers. This situation
continued for years, until the William Pitt the Younger became Prime Minister
in 1783. With the Commutation Act of 1784, he slashed the tax on tea so
dramatically that smuggling became pointless. Thereafter virtually all tea was
imported legally by the East India Company.

In the decades leading up to Pitt the Younger's Commutation Act, tea
smuggling had really hit the profits of the East India Company. Needing to
increase profits and offload the surplus tea that the Company had accumulated
during the worst years of the smuggling, it asked the British government for
permission to export direct to America, which at this time was still a British
colony. Permission was granted, and it was decided that the tea would carry a
tax of 3d per lb. The Americans were outraged, many considered such
British-imposed taxes illegal. They were doubly angered by the decision that
the Company should also have a monopoly on distribution, another move that was
intended to help it out of financial trouble. When the Company's ships arrived
in Boston in late 1773, the townspeople resolved that the tea should not be
brought ashore nor the duty on it on paid. But the colonial administration
would not allow the ships to leave port. The deadlock eventually resulted in
the Boston
Tea Party, when a mass of townspeople, dressed as Native Americans, boarded the
ships and threw all the cargo of tea overboard. This was one of the key events
that sparked off the American War of Independence.

When America eventually won its independence from British rule in 1783,
it began its own freeand independent tea
trade with China. The success of this trade made some people in Britain question the wisdom of
the East India Company's ongoing monopoly on British trade with the
East. In 1813, the Company lost its monopoly on trade with India, but
still had a complete monopoly on trade with China, which meant it was heavily
dependent on the tea trade. The Company's charter was due for renewal in 1834,
and in the decades before that there was a growing call for the abolition of
the monopoly and the instigation of free trade with China as well. Supporters
of free trade argued strongly that the Company kept tea prices artificially
high in order to maximise its profits, using tactics which included restricting
the supply of tea. One anonymous pamphleteer writing in 1824 stated that 'the
lordly grocers of Leadenhall Street [where the Company was based] have most
scandalously abused the monopoly of which they are now in possession'.
Comparing the prices of tea sold at auction in London with the prices at
auction in Hamburg and New York, he thundered that 'the monopoly of the tea
trade enjoyed by the East India Company costs the people of this country, on
average, not less than TWO
MILLIONS TWO HUNDRED THOUSAND pounds sterling a year!'

The movement
gathered pace, and committees were set up by free trade
organisations to examine the evidence. The report of one such committee in 1828
claimed that the restriction of supply by the East India Company, and the
artificially high prices, had actually driven down the annual consumption of
duty-paid tea per person in Britain, from almost 28oz in 1800 to just 20oz in
1828. This was particularly objectionable because (in the words of another
contemporary pamphleteer) tea was one 'of the principal necessaries of life'.
The report noted with abject horror that tea consumption among the 'poor
convict population' of New South Wales in Australia, which enjoyed direct trade
with China, was over three times higher than among the 'free and wealthy people
of Great Britain'. It concluded that 'in the United Kingdom, where the Company
have a complete monopoly, they fleece their countrymen of the last penny they
can give'.

An
added complication was that at the same time, the East India Company's sphere
of activity was fundamentally changing.Charles II's charter to the Company had
allowed it to use military force where necessary to establish trading stations,
and in the seventeenth and eigthteenth centuries it established many
well-fortified trading posts in India. Over the course of the eighteenth
century, the control of the Mughal Emperor in Delhi was in decline, with
independent regional princes taking power instead. But unhappy with this turn
of events, the Company increasingly used its private army to
establish governmental control over large territories of India. By the beginning
of the nineteenth century, with help from the British army, the Company had
conquered about half of India.

Thus India was
being ruled by twenty-four merchants from the East India Company boardroom in
Leadenhall St, London, the same merchants who controlled British trade with the
east. This caused great uneasiness to many in Britain, who considered the dual
roles of merchant and ruler to be completely incompatible. This view was
eloquently summed up by a writer in 1831, who argued that as well as losing its
trade monopoly, the Company must have nothing to do with commercial affairs as
long as it had anything to do with the government of India. He wrote, 'we
object to their (the Company) being allowed to combine in their own persons the
seperate and irreconcilable functions of tea-dealers and rulers of a mighty
empire. Let them make their election; let them choose as to whether they will
be grocers or emperors; but do not allow them to attempt both... To be a good
grocer or a cheesemonger, a man must be nothing else. If the Company prefer
these useful functions to those of a loftier character, we shall not blame them
for their choice. But we protest against their being allowed to carry a sword
in one hand and a ledger in the other - to act at once as sovereigns and tea
dealers.'

These arguments were too powerful for the British government
to ignore. In 1834, Parliament's new charter for the Company abolished its
trading functions altogether. Instead, the Company became an agent of the
British government, administering British India on behalf of the Crown. India
was still to be ruled from the boardroom of the East India Company, but its
rulers would no longer also be tea dealers. China was still the major source of
tea, and since the Company had now been relieved of any trading rights with
China, its thoughts turned to the possibility of growing tea in India.
Previously, when the Company had had a monopoly on the Chinese trade, it had
not been in its interests to encourage cultivation of tea elsewhere.

A Tea Committee was
established to investigate where in India might be most suitable for the
cultivation of tea plants and seed imported from China, and to oversee that
cultivation. One obvious area was Assam, where indigenous tea plants had
already been found growing. Seeds from China were germinated in Calcutta and
then sent on to Assam and other areas to conduct trials. C.A. Bruce, an agent
of the East India Company in Assam, was appointed Superintendent of Tea Forests
and set about cultivating plantations of both China tea and indigenous tea. In
1838 12 chests of Assam tea were sent to the East India Company in London. Some
was used for public relations purposes - sending out samples to stimulate
interest - and the rest went to the regular London Tea Auction. This was the
first auction of Assam tea in London, and the novelty of the product ensured
that it got a very good price. Bruce's experiment had been a resounding
success. A new organisation, the Assam Company, was formed to exploit the
potential of Assam tea. This new company faced many problems - not least the
need to capture and train wild elephants which were necessary to transport tea
through the dense jungles - but by 1855 tea cultivation in Assam amounted to
over half a million lbs.

Soon though events in India were to take a dramatic turn. The East India
Company had lost its trading rights, but it had not lost its desire to make
money. The cost of the Company's of India administration was met through heavy
taxation and charges on the Indian people - they even had to pay for medals to
be struck to commemorate their own conquest. There were localised rebellions
and the Company used increasingly heavy-handed tactics to control the Indian
population. In May 1857 three regiments of Indian soldiers serving in the
Company's army at Meerut near Delhi rebelled. The revolt spread, and led to a
vicious conflict as the British forces tried to put it down. The rebellion
lasted over a year, during which time both sides committed acts of terrible
cruelty. Even after peace was established, the trust between the Indians and
the East India Company administration was destroyed. The British government
decided that enough was enough, and directly assumed all the Company's powers
and possessions in India. The first viceroy, Lord Canning, was appointed to
govern British India.

The heyday of the
East India Company was well and truly over, but the heyday of Indian tea
production was just beginning. With the exception of Darjeeling, which was
producing high-quality but low-yielding tea crops, there was little tea
cultivation outside Assam. The new British administration in India saw the
potential for more widespread cultivation and offered generous land leases to
would-be tea planters. By 1888 Indian tea production had reached 86 million lbs
- and for the first time British tea imports from India exceeded those from
China.